The aim of this study is to gain an understanding of how gender is discussed in the context of Finnish crisis management. By utilizing the report of the Parliamentary Committee on Crisis Management as a single case study, the study seeks to examine if and how the report embodies elements of liberal feminism in its discussion on gender. Since this study is based upon liberal feminism, specific coding was applied to identify those parts of the report that discuss gender, with each coding category deriving from liberal feminist philosophy. The findings of this study suggest that the discussion on gender in the context of Finnish crisis management is strongly focused on women and especially, efforts to strengthen the presence of female experts in crisis management operations. By highlighting the need to strengthen equal gender distribution among experts employed to crisis management operations, the report embodies several liberal feminist values, such as achieving gender equality. However, as the report only discusses gender in terms of women and girls, it excludes both men and boys. Based on these findings, this study argues that the way the report embodies liberal feminist thinking is potentially problematic since its discussion on gender does not consider men and women to an equal extent.

L’apaisement de l’antagonisme Est-Ouest suite à la chute du Mur de Berlin, modifie l’équilibre stratégique mondial et suscite le réveil de conflits dits « gelés ». Dans ce contexte, les Etats européens saisissent la nécessité de se doter d’un cadre politico-stratégique commun (PESC) afin de contribuer au maintien de la paix et de la sécurité internationales. Avec la mise en place de la PESC, puis d’une dimension opérationnelle à son action extérieure (PSDC), l’UE ambitionne à devenir un acteur stratégique majeur pour la gestion des crises. Le développement de capacités « non-militaires » – civiles – de la PSDC, dédiées à la conduite d’activités de reconstruction post-conflit, constitue une véritable valeur ajoutée. Malgré la jeunesse de sa PSDC, l’UE représente indéniablement une force positive pour la sécurité coopérative aux côtés des autres acteurs de la sécurité. Les défis actuels appellent néanmoins à une réactualisation de la stratégie sécuritaire européenne. / The end of the Cold War modified the fragile security equilibrium established for over fifty years, bringing frozen conflicts to the forefront of the international security environment. Confronted with this new reality, EU member states seized the necessity of developing a common political and strategic framework (CFSP), in order to help maintain peace and international security. The establishment of the CFSP and of an operational dimension to its external action (CSDP), illustrate the EU’s ambition to becoming a key strategic player in crisis management. By developing civilian capabilities within its CSDP, destined for post-conflict reconstruction activities, the EU aims at providing a real added value to modern crisis management. Despite the insufficiencies of its newly created CSDP, the EU positively contributes to cooperative security alongside other security actors. Current security challenges nevertheless require an updating of its strategy.

This essay deals with analysis of the phenomenon of EU's police missions as an integral part of civilian crisis management within European Security and Defense Policy. It outlined the development and evaluation of EU's operational civilian capabilities. The focus of the work is an analysis and comparison of selected police missions in terms of conditions that the EU can not influence to such an extent and that still deeply affect the course of implementation of the mission. The study also deals with the evaluation of concrete operations in terms of successful fulfillment of their mandates. Our research question relates to the external conditions of a total of five realized EU's police missions. Our presumption is the claim that socio-economic context of a country deeply influence the course of EU's action and therefore has an impact on the fulfillment of the mandate of police missions. Considerations to what extent is EU itself responsible for the success or failure of each mission and how external factors affect the mission objectives led us to the choice of topic.

La gestione civile delle crisi (GCC) si inserisce nel contesto della Politica Europea di Sicurezza e Difesa (PESD) che, a sua volta, è uno degli elementi della più ampia PESC (Politica Estera e di Sicurezza Comune). GCC, PESD e PESC sono componenti delle relazioni esterne dell'Unione europea (UE). La gestione civile delle crisi è una policy dell'UE la cui analisi richiede di rispondere a diversi quesiti teorico pratici: 1) cosa è esattamente la gestione civile delle crisi e a cosa essa corrisponde in ambito UE (Capitolo I); 2) quali sono le caratteristiche generali delle iniziative civili per il mantenimento della pace e della sicurezza internazionali realizzate dalle Nazioni Unite (NU), dall'Organizzazione per la Sicurezza e la Cooperazione in Europa (OSCE), dall'Unione dell'Europa Occidentale e dalla NATO (Capitolo I), 3) come si è sviluppata la GCC dal trattato di Maastricht a oggi (Capitolo II e Capitolo III); 4) come si concepisce, pianifica e lancia una missione di GCC (Capitolo iv); quali sono le missioni di GCC realizzate dall'UE dal 1997 al 2006 (capitolo v); 5) quale è la relazione tra PESC, PESD E GCC e il valore aggiunto della GCC dell'ue rispetto ad altre organizzazioni internazionali (Conclusioni) / Civilian Crisis Management (CCM) is part of the European security and defence policy (ESDP), which is, on its own, an element of the broader common foreign and security policy (CFSP). CCM, ESDP and CFSP are tools of the external relations of the European Union (EU) . Civilian crisis management is a policy of the EU whose analysis requires both a theoretical and practical approach. It is indispensable to understand what civilian crisis management is, in general, and specifically in the framework of the European Union (Chapter I). Afterwards, some attention has been devoted to the investigation of the civilian crisis management initiatives of the United Nations (UN), of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), of the Western European Union (WEU) and of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) (Chapter I). A further step in the understanding of the CCM of the EU is the evaluation of its historical evolution from the Treaty of Maastricht up to 2006 (Chapter II and III). It is also paramount to consider how CCM missions are designed, planned and deployed (Chapter IV) and which missions have been carried trough until 2006 (Chapter V). Finally, it has been evaluated which is the current relations in-between CCM, ESDP and CFSP and which is the added value of EU's CCM compared to the initiatives of other international organizations (Conclusions).